Reply With Quote
I'm open-minded and waiting to hear that the Repugs/VRWC have done anything positive for the country in the last 40 years.
Anybody?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolit...ies-over-facts
Highlights:
When pollsters ask Republicans and Democrats whether the president can do anything about high gas prices, the answers reflect the usual partisan divisions in the country. About two-thirds of Republicans say the president can do something about high gas prices, and about two-thirds of Democrats say he can't.
But six years ago, with a Republican president in the White House, the numbers were reversed: Three-fourths of Democrats said President Bush could do something about high gas prices, while the majority of Republicans said gas prices were clearly outside the president's control.Nyhan and Reifler hypothesized that partisans reject such information not because they're against the facts, but because it's painful. That notion suggested a possible solution: If partisans were made to feel better about themselves — if they received a little image and ego boost — could this help them more easily absorb the "blow" of information that threatens their pre-existing views?
Nyhan said that ongoing — and as yet, unpublished — research was showing the technique could be effective. The researchers had voters think of times in their lives when they had done something very positive and found that, fortified by this positive memory, voters were more willing to take in information that challenged their pre-existing views.
I'm open-minded and waiting to hear that the Repugs/VRWC have done anything positive for the country in the last 40 years.
Anybody?
lol
If anyone is going to answer boutons' question, make sure you give him a compliment first.
Sort of like the people who put thier heads in the sand when it became obvious we had been sold a set of bad goods on the reasons for the Iraq war..and now those same people want to get to the bottom of the fast and furious 'scandal
I'm sorry. He lost me at "I'm open minded."
Outstanding article.
Reagan was a big part of the SSC in Waxahachie. It would have been amazing to have the Dallas area as the center of the physics world had it not been cancelled under Clinton.
During the design and the first construction stage, a heated debate ensued about the high cost of the project. In 1987, Congress was told the project could be completed for $4.4 billion, and it gained the enthusiastic support of Speaker Jim Wright of nearby Fort Worth.[5][dubious – discuss] By 1993, the cost projection exceeded $12 billion. A recurring argument was the contrast with NASA's contribution to the International Space Station (ISS), a similar dollar amount.[3] Critics of the project argued that the US could not afford both of them. Early in 1993 a group supported by funds from project contractors organized a public relations campaign to lobby Congress directly,[6] but in June, the non-profit Project on Government Oversight released a draft audit report by the Department of Energy's Inspector General heavily criticizing the Super Collider for its high costs and poor management by officials in charge of it.[7][8]Reagan was a big part of the SSC in Waxahachie. It would have been amazing to have the Dallas area as the center of the physics world had it not been cancelled under Clinton.
A high-level schematic of the lab landscape during the final planning phases.
Congress officially canceled the project October 21, 1993[9] after $2 billion had been spent.[10] Many factors contributed to the cancellation:[3] rising cost estimates; poor management by physicists and Department of Energy officials; the end of the need to prove the supremacy of American science with the collapse of the Soviet Union; belief that many smaller scientific experiments of equal merit could be funded for the same cost; Congress's desire to generally reduce spending; the reluctance of Texas Governor Ann Richards;[11] and President Bill Clinton's initial lack of support for a project begun during the administrations of Richards's predecessor, Bill Clements, and Clinton's predecessors, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. However, in 1993, Clinton tried to prevent the cancellation by asking Congress to continue "to support this important and challenging effort" through completion because "abandoning the SSC at this point would signal that the United States is compromising its position of leadership in basic science".[12]
Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in Physics, places the cancellation of the SSC in the context of a bigger national and global socio-economic crisis, and not just for science.[3]
President Clinton signed the bill which finally cancelled the project on October 31, 1993, stating regret at the "serious loss" for science
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superco...Super_Collider
anybody else?
President Clinton signed the bill which finally cancelled the project on October 31, 1993, stating regret at the "serious loss" for science
omfg
did Clinton write the bill?
btw, Clinton isn't a Repug.
"I'm open-minded and waiting to hear that the Repugs/VRWC have done anything positive for the country in the last 40 years."
Lrn2read
But here's a quick hit off the top of my head:
EPA
Surely you can read that short, 3 letter combo.
The SSC was a creation of the Regan administration. The Clinton administration killed it.
, dude. Lrn2read.
I answered you; Reagan helped get that project started. And Clinton voted for killing it by signing the bill. lol partisan dumbass
gfy
Big science used to be the GOP. Not anymore.Reagan was a big part of the SSC in Waxahachie. It would have been amazing to have the Dallas area as the center of the physics world had it not been cancelled under Clinton.
Eyup.
"we're broke" (ie, the 99%)
that's why St Ronnie is way too left for today's Repugs.
That's why your asinine implication was shot down immediately.
Again. :facepalm
lol @ openminded.
Congress officially canceled the project October 21, 1993 after $2 billion had been spent.[13] Many factors contributed to the cancellation:[3] rising cost estimates; poor management by physicists and Department of Energy officials; the end of the need to prove the supremacy of American science with the collapse of the Soviet Union; belief that many smaller scientific experiments of equal merit could be funded for the same cost; Congress's desire to generally reduce spending; the reluctance of Texas Governor Ann Richards;[14] and President Bill Clinton's initial lack of support for a project begun during the administrations of Richards's predecessor, Bill Clements, and Clinton's predecessors, Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.
However, in 1993, Clinton tried to prevent the cancellation by asking Congress to continue "to support this important and challenging effort" through completion because "abandoning the SSC at this point would signal that the United States is compromising its position of leadership in basic science".[15]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superco...Super_Collider
You missed the bill he signed right?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
